EPTNorth Korea says/does surprising and alarming thing - Page…
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States44361 Posts
On August 10 2017 23:22 SoSexy wrote: You know what - we can just wait and see what happens. I stand that China will dump NK rather than lose its economic power. And that'll be great, especially if you can get them to do it in the late 1990s so we can stop the NK nuclear program. But your plan of "attack NK and hope it's the time China betrays them" is not really as good as the plan of "wait for China to betray them, then attack". Also "we can just wait and see what happens with China" is exactly what the current policy is. In one page you appear to have swung around to join the consensus of everyone else who understands the situation. That's why nobody is invading North Korea. I appear to have successfully educated you. A page ago you didn't understand why everyone was standing around waiting for China to dump NK when there were concentration camps. Now you've got this new plan called waiting. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 173346
16169 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 173346
16169 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States44361 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9068 Posts
On August 10 2017 23:52 plasmidghost wrote: I fear Trump more than I fear NK. Trump ordered the bombing of the Syrian government and managed to not significantly escalate things in the region. What worries me most is that this could make him think he could do it to NK and get away with it. Is that a realistic line of thought? The plans were already drawn up and waiting. Trump just gave the generals what they've been wanting to do the ok to do it. Make no mistake, he's not playing chess. And no, he wouldn't be able to strike NK and get away with it just because a hair grew up his ass. These things take a long time to plan out and maneuver assets around. Let the generals do their job and let trump tweet. That's our best option until we get a more competent person in the WH. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9068 Posts
On August 11 2017 00:02 LegalLord wrote: Letting the generals do what they want is only slightly less dangerous than letting Trump do what he wants. I'm not saying give them reigns to control the country, but in matters of the military, I'd rather have them calling the shots. They're more reluctant to strike at NK or other countries unless they have definitive proof, and even then, they'd try to get something else on the table. If anything bad happens, they'll have to face public outcry and a lot of generals like their job. | ||
|
Deleted User 173346
16169 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 11 2017 01:35 plasmidghost wrote: Trump has been doing that in the ME, but if he really wanted to, he could order them to strike and they'd have no choice but to unless they want to get court-martialed or worse, right? There is some build up to it and likely notice to congress. He needs to ask for a plan from the pentagon to approve first. Of course they have a bunch on hand, but they would present him with options. And during that time, Congress would get a heads up and so on. He can't just order them to "go bomb North Korea" and let the general figure it out. | ||
|
Deleted User 173346
16169 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States44361 Posts
On August 11 2017 01:48 plasmidghost wrote: At least we have that going for us, hopefully there are enough checks on him to prevent any rash decisions There aren't as many as there used to be. In Clinton's day one served as Secretary of State. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On August 10 2017 22:53 KwarK wrote: I know right? But NK has concentration camps! Therfore we need to destroy the concentration camps! With bombs! Crisis averted.Are you suggesting that there might not be a humanitarian justification for consuming the civilian population of NK in a nuclear fire? Big if true. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
Kim Jong-un may not be a very stable world leader, but Xi Jinping must understand the consequences of attacking the US. That would just be mutually assured destruction. It makes no sense to honour an agreement that would lead to the complete obliteration of your country, unless the Chinese have some well-developed missile defense systems. I'm pretty skeptical of that. Nevertheless I still agree..its a bad idea to test that theory even if it seems likely to be true. | ||
|
KwarK
United States44361 Posts
Pretty much the only way we survived the Cold War was by whenever anyone said "but they'd never go to war over that, I know they said they would but it wouldn't be rational" agreeing, but not doing the thing anyway. | ||
| ||
